Former Murdoch Exec: Fox News Is Poison For America

[babylonsister]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-the-far-right-iii-three-percenters-infiltrated-whidbey-island-in-washington?ref=scroll

Former Murdoch Exec: Fox News Is Poison For America
HATEWATCH
The Rupert Murdoch I worked for was brilliant, courageous, optimistic, and a gentleman. Which makes his bile-filled network all the more confounding.
Preston Padden
Updated Jul. 05, 2021 1:56AM ET / Published Jul. 05, 2021 1:21AM ET



snip//

But, in recent years things have gone badly off the tracks at Fox News. Fox News is no longer is a truthful center-right news network. The channel (especially the leading prime-time opinion programming) has contributed substantially and directly to:

the unnecessary deaths of many Americans by disparaging the wearing of life-saving COVID masks;

divisions in our society by stoking racial animus and fueling the totally false impression that Black Lives Matter and Antifa are engaged in nightly, life-threatening riots across the country;

the unnecessary deaths of many Americans by fueling hesitation and doubt about the efficacy and safety of life-saving COVID-19 vaccines [Fox News provided me examples of pro-mask/vaccine on-air comments, but in my opinion, they were heavily outweighed by the negative comments of the highly rated primetime opinion hosts];

former President Trump’s “Big Lie” that the election was stolen from him by providing a continuous platform for wild and false claims about the election—claims refuted by more than 60 judges, Republican State election officials, recounts in numerous States and Trump’s own Attorney General; and

the Jan. 6, 2021, violent assault on the U.S. Capitol by continually promoting former President Trump’s “Stop The Steal” rally.

Fox News has caused many millions of Americans—most of them Republicans (as my wife and I were for 50 years)—to believe things that simply are not true. For example, Yahoo News reports that 73 percent of Republicans blame “left-wing protesters” for the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. Of course, that is ludicrous. All one has to do is look at the pictures or videos of the attack to see that the violent mob was comprised of Trump supporters. Similarly, a poll by SSRS in late April found that two-thirds of Republicans either believe or suspect that the election was stolen from Trump—60 percent saying there is “hard evidence” that the election was stolen. As noted above, this ridiculous notion has been thoroughly refuted. But millions of Americans believe these falsehoods because they have been drilled into their minds, night after night, by Fox News.

more...

https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-the-far-right-iii-three-percenters-infiltrated-whidbey-island-in-washington?ref=scroll

[uponit7771]

1. K&R, a public fact check consortium to keep them isolated would go a long way

[Ferryboat]

36. My comments were on the not correct 1st link,

Not revelent to original post

[CurtEastPoint]

2. correct link for last reference, Daily Beast

https://www.thedailybeast.com/former-murdoch-exec-says-fox-news-is-poison-for-america?ref=home

[AZ8theist]

3. In other news, water is wet...

[Pinback]

24. Yes, but when someone affiliated with a group denying the existence of water

says “Water is wet” it’s worthy of note. A couple of decades too late in this case, but of interest nonetheless.

Whether this statement has any lasting positive effect remains to be seen. There’s a current trend of people formerly in high places within the right-wing establishment trying to rehabilitate their reputations, and that may be all this is.

[brush]

37. Exactly. Somebody rose to be an executive at FOX and just realized all this?

Why that sounds like consciousness of guilt, which is a defining characteristic of a crime.

Mea culpas don't erase it.

[tenderfoot]

4. truthful center-right news network

LOL.

[niyad]

7. I nearly spit out my coffee.

[tanyev]

14. +1

Ludicrous.

[yardwork]

21. Still trying to put lipstick on that old pig.

[zentrum]

22. Well said!

[ProfessorGAC]

53. When Was That?

The first 10 minutes after they went on the air?

[live love laugh]

59. Exactly.

[malaise]

5. Duh!

Murdoch was always shit

[-misanthroptimist]

6. We badly need a legal definition for "news" in America

And then we need to make sure that those branding themselves as news are held to that standard.

[Volaris]

11. I'll offer this: it has to be revenue-neutral or non-profit.

Yes, there will be ads. Anything not spent paying your writers/journalists/anchors/production teams must be given to a trust fund to be donated to americas state university Journalism Schools. If not, you dont get to call it news.

[brooklynite]

13. Yes you do; so says that pesky First Amendment.

[Ligyron]

16. Yeah, but nobody is stopping them from saying whatever they want.

Just in classifying the lies as truth or passing it off as actual, legitimate news.

Can we at least do that?

[brooklynite]

23. No, we can't

Not being allowed to regulate free speech includes not being able to regulate what is described as "news".....

[Moostache]

34. I disagree there...

The Constitution has long accepted limits to "free speech" when the public safety is at stake. Categorizing something as one thing versus another is not the same as creating actual penalties, enforced by government agencies, or in other words allowing consequences to be clear.

If you wander into a crowded place and falsely create a panic by screaming "Fire!!!! We're all gonna die!!!!", such an act is still illegal despite any claims to free speech protection.


*Caveat - with the current 6-3 abomination of a SCOTUS, there is a better than 50-50% chance that any such laws or limits would be challenged and overturned...though such rationale is CLEARLY influenced by an overt right-wing favoring interpretation of the Bill of Rights....the same demented thinking that corrupts the 2nd would also infect the 1st...

[brooklynite]

41. The Court is irrelevant...

No Congress, Democratic or Republican, is going to define “news”. Nor should they.

[Moostache]

42. Then don't regulate the "news" designation...require sources and journalism not sophistry.

If it is illegal to endanger others through exercise of free speech, then is it not also illegal to knowingly deceive people by shouting "FRAUD!" where there is no evidence of it?

Lying - knowingly spreading disinformation - is NOT 'free speech'...it is propaganda and a disservice to the knowledge of an informed citizenry, required for a representative republic to function.

The use of the press as a weapon of mass distraction has had real and horrifying consequences on the country and our form of governance. There MUST be limits on speech to have a functioning republic, and our current quagmire is proof positive of this.

[brooklynite]

45. Take that up with Biden, Pelosi and Schumer and let us know what they say...

I can take a guess in the meantime.

[Ligyron]

48. How then do truth in advertising laws exist?

Enforced by the Federal Trade Commision, a government agency, for instance.

Or how does the FDA, another government agency, enforce what can and cannot be said/claimed regarding drugs or supplements?

Ray gun killed the Fairness Doctrine true, but it just seems like we should be able to do something about curbing the mass propaganda campaign that's lying 24/7 on cable news and radio and hell bent on destroying democracy.

This isn't aimed at you personally, it's pretty much rhetorical. I'm just blowing off steam

[Volaris]

56. My response to Brooklynite was going to consist of: 'tell that to the Snake Oil Salesmen'

And then ask the FDA what they think about the First Amendment.

You all, beat me to it.

[Dustlawyer]

38. Free speech can be regulated if there is a clear and compelling governmental interest.

Just like you cannot shout “fire” in a crowded theater if there is no fire.

[brooklynite]

40. But you can shout "news" in a TV studio.

[Moostache]

43. If you shout "news", then you should have to prove it.

Sources, facts (not loudly shouted opinions) and basic consistency with the laws of physics and science are a good place to start. I am sorry, but things like biology, physics, and chemistry are not speculative pursuits. Gravity simply IS...anyone doubting this is invited to step off of a high building while praying to stop their demise.

In that same TV studio, you should have limitations on just how you cans scream "FRAUD" without supporting evidence...

[brooklynite]

44. When the Republicans run the Government again, do you really want them defining "news"?

[Moostache]

54. I want a standard to be called news - something objective and de-politicized...

The definition of something factual does NOT leave room for interpretation based on political philosophy.
The statement of being entitled to one's own opinion but not one's own facts is my baseline.

There should NEVER be such a thing as political 'facts'...THAT is where we have run off the rails and into the mire...

[brooklynite]

58. And who gets to define this objective standard?

[dianaredwing]

49. Good point

Just rebrand it. News it is not any more. Truth of the moment? Pictures and interviews on the scene? Breaking news has to go. Kids can and do, thank goodness, film and comment on 'breaking news' that is more valid than the scripted edited crap that comes off as news these days. Investigative journalism is a good thing. News for entertainment is not.

[Moostache]

55. News for profit is a hideous thing...

The intent of the news is to inform and awaken the mind.
The intent of TV is to placate and anesthetize the mind.

That is the fundamental problem with information in the early 21st century...its a weaponized commodity to divide instead of an illuminating resource to unite and THAT must go - even if it eviscerates and requires a renewal of the Bill of Rights...we're about 150 years past due on that count in my mind too...

[Mariana]

62. Most of the lies are actually spread on the opinion shows.

Gullible watchers may accept whatever the hosts say as gospel, but that doesn't change the fact that the most popular programming by far on Faux et al. are the editorial/opinion shows. That's where most of the lies are being spread. How do you fix that?

[Eyeball_Kid]

28. The First Amendment allows Fox to SAY

that they are a news channel, even though they denied it in Court and defined their business as "entertainment." So their very title, Fox News, is a lie repeated solely to attract viewers and advertisers. For everybody else, "news" is the dissemination of facts that occur in the real world. For Fox, "news" is a euphemism for propaganda based upon cynicism, innuendo, distrust, and influence from foreign adversaries. Defining what they do as "news" is Orwellian by design.

But, yes, it falls within the First Amendment rights. And it's only sustainable because Fox charges cable companies exorbitant fees to carry their channel. They can likely survive on those fees alone. Any revenues that they gain from advertising is frosting on their cake.

[TexasBushwhacker]

52. Before cable and the 24 hour news cycle

and Reagan getting rid of the Fairness Doctrine, it was fairly neutral and it wasn't expected to make money. But that all changed in the 80s.

[Caliman73]

67. Partially correct.

The Fairness Doctrine did affect the legacy broadcasters. The real problem however, came in the 1990's when the Telecommunications Act was signed. That deregulated ownership of media. That allowed right wing millionaires and billionaires to essentially take over AM radio. That allowed companies like Fox, Clear Channel, CBN, and others to buy up affiliate stations and saturate markets with right wing propaganda.

Cable news was always less regulated than legacy or "terrestrial" broadcasters. The legacies, ABC, CBS, and NBC used "public" airwaves, which is why the FCC could compel them to the Fairness Doctrine. Cable news is private, you have to pay to access it, so they are not subject to the "licensing" requirement that the big 3 were held to. The reason why you can watch R rated movies unedited on HBO or Showtime, but not on NBC. The reason why you can watch R rated movies any time of day now (it used to be that even cable couldn't air R rated before a certain time, but FCC was not allowed to put that restriction on cable.

[live love laugh]

60. It's just a name. They classified themselves as entertainment to get around the Fairness Doctrine

which once required news networks to give equal time to opposing views.

Of course, that requirement’s been eliminated. But the classification as entertainment never changed.


Something has to be done about the responsibility for truth telling and not just defining what is or is not news.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

63. The FD had no effect on Faux, it only applied to over the air broadcasting,

not cable, satellite or internet.

[thesquanderer]

65. Correct. Also, FD ended in 1987, Fox News began in 1996.

So even if they were over the air, it STILL wouldn't have applied!

[MarineCombatEngineer]

68. Yep.

I failed to mention that.
Thanks.

[Kid Berwyn]

8. Murdoch n FOX helped lie America into illegal, immoral, unnecessary war on Iraq.

Twice.

[Botany]

10. And they lied us into the w Presidency by saying that Florida was going to bush in 2000.

n/t

[onetexan]

15. +1 -K&R. Faux News supported the GOP's big lie

[Botany]

9. Of course Fox News is a cancer on America ... it helped egg on the 1/6/21 Trump Coup

Either one or two days prior to 1/6/21 the morning blond on Fox was still pushing the
"a lot of people still have questions about the election" lie.

I think I read and or heard what Fox does is illegal in Canada because it is phony news pretending
to be real news and it is based on lies, propaganda, and emotional manipulation.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

12. Fox News is mobster-friendly, like the Republicans...

... and Putin's Russia.

[YoshidaYui]

17. been saying this for years.

Fox News has to die.. its destroying our nation...from the inside out.

[Eyeball_Kid]

29. When cable companies deny Fox News their huge cable fees,

Fox will have change their programming to compete. Right now, the they collect keep them afloat. The content of their programming only has to appeal to a small sliver of potential audience. The fees comprise of the steady, predictable revenue stream that keeps their media stars floating in millions.

Fox will have a more difficult time maintaining their influence as more streaming services become available to the nation's television watchers-- nearly everyone who has a roof over their heads-- and coaxial cable feeds give way to routers and internet feeds. Those streaming services are far more flexible than the big cable companies like Comcast and can tailor their programming to individual preferences. I have a streaming service for television that does NOT include Fox News, and I won't pay any fees that go to FNC because of my choice for a streaming service. That's how to FNC will die.

[YoshidaYui]

46. a NETWORK OF insurrectionist apologists

meh

[kentuck]

18. Indeed!

All because they thought they had to report the opposite of everyone else in order to be "fair and balanced".

[ChrisF1961]

19. Was watching a WWII documentary

and one person said that even in April 45, the critical thinking skills of the German people was so worn down by years of lies they couldn’t see reality even though it was staring them in the face. The same is true of many Republicans now.

[tavernier]

20. Not just America

He created torture and grief in England with the Sun publication, giving no peace to gay men and women and especially anyone of celebrity including Freddie Mercury, Elton John, the Beatles and Stones and Lady Diana.

He is no courageous gentleman… he is a money grubbing sociopath.

[thesquanderer]

66. re: "he is a money grubbing sociopath"

Very possibly. Though I also wonder whether he cares any more about Australia than the U.S., which may make him less a sociopath and more a nationalist.

At the end of the article, the author says:

Over the past nine months I have tried, with increasing bluntness, to get Rupert to understand the real damage that Fox News is doing to America. I failed, and it was arrogant and naïve to ever have thought that I could succeed. I am at a loss to understand why he will not change course.

It is possible he doesn't change course because he doesn't care... simply because, to him, the U.S. is simply an entity to be exploited for his own gain. He is not an American citizen, much less any kind of American patriot. Maybe he cares about Australia, but it is not unreasonable to think he may care as little about the U.S. as many U.S. people/companies care about what happens in other countries. We have exploited other countries for our gain plenty of times... and he may simply be doing the same to us.

[amuse bouche]

25. I have never been able to watch Fux Spews for more than 2 minutes

I just don't understand how Americans can digest this foul trash, and its vile hosts

[Tiger8]

26. I knew a guy who subscribed to "The Limbaugh Letter" and Arbitron Ratings...

..."randomly selected" him to complete a survey about his radio listening habits. He claimed that he got a survey every year.

Companies rely on these surveys to make advertising decisions. But it seems obvious that that Arbitron and Limbaugh had some type of a deal going on...or at least, there was a Mole inside Arbitron feeding Limbaugh subscribers into the "random" mix.

My spidey sense has always told me the entire Right Wing Universe is at least partly propped up by shadowy money - oil, gun, big ag industries, Koch, heirs to fortunes and other wealthy financiers, religious and fascist leaders, etc.

[Eyeball_Kid]

31. Your spidey sense hits the nail on the head.

The question of Fox News' survival always rests with "cui bono."

[Tiger8]

35. Yes, and advertisers give them credibility they need.

If Fox News was on-air 24/7 with no ads, even some of the dumb-dumbs might begin to ask "cui bono."

Advertisers give them credibility - which is why I try my best to never buy anything from any Fox News advertiser.

[dianaredwing]

50. gun running, underage prositution

opioid sales, you name it. I bet every modern evil can be traced back to that group of sociopaths.

[Wounded Bear]

27. Gee, ya think?

[hay rick]

30. In the early 2000s I renamed what Fox does as traitorvision.

It's much worse now.

[Zorro]

32. Murdoch delights and enjoys being the source influencing worldwide anarchy and confusion

His ego is even bigger than Old Yeller's.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

33. That's how former Australian PM, Malcolm Turnbull...

... described the sick power-hungry minds of the Murdoch family.

Edit; Turnbull explained their motives, according to him, around the 6.5-minute mark of that video.

[Initech]

39. Been saying this since Bush V Gore!

Fox News stole that election from us.

[mdbl]

57. The goons that went to Florida to intimidate the election workers

ballooned into the Jan 6 insurrection. They need to be separated from civilized society, maybe on some island.

[roamer65]

47. I think we will eventually find out Murdoch was a tool of Russian intelligence.

[wolfie001]

51. NEWS CORPSE/RUPERT MURDOCH.....

....owns the Dow Jones and the Wall Street Journal. Is it any wonder the Dems can sustain any messaging when this sinister muther fucker is muddying up the entire political realm?

[The Wizard]

61. Brain rotting

Russian propaganda and wild assertions.

[andym]

64. Think of Murdoch as the man behind America's "Big Brother"

Well Fox News has gone Orwellian in its bias and lies. Trump helped them achieve it-- in a sense he became Big Brother for a segment of the population, but it was really co-founder Ailes idea to begin with-- he wanted a GOP propaganda "news" service that would have made the potential impeachment and removal of Nixon impossible. Basically Nixon's former media consultant wanted to prevent future Nixons' resignations. He didn't live to see that he had achieved his goal.

Their shows provide various forums for two minutes of hate every day. Doublethink is apparent continually.